Related posts:

This entry was posted on Thursday, December 6th, 2012 at 8:00 am and is filed under Uncategorized.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.

Transgender people have a unique problem with marriage inequality – when a spouse changes gender they must either divorce or they can’t change their legal gender status. Trans are small in numbers but I think this is an important aspect of the debate.

The herald reports….King Tuheitia has again written to Waikato-Tainui members warning them that politically the tribe is on the “brink of calamity” and pointedly telling “Pakeha commentators” to keep out of the tribe’s business.

So – the fouled mouthed ex truck driver has burst into print again….

Well we can sure of several things.
1. He hasnt got the education nor where-with-all to write some thing like is claimed (where is Tuku….).
2. His really pissed with Chris Trotter for (correctly) calling him an Ass
3. The fouled mouth ex truck driver actually thinks hes a real king – not on who is there simply for convenience.

The maori king movement is one of the most powerful examples of aboriginies wanting to be like the colonial arrivals. Maybe the fouled mouthed ex truck driver doesnt understand this when he says that Pakeha should shut the fuck up. He is the prime example of maori wanting to be like pakeha – and maybe he should listen a bit more.

Well one is a dream that will not exist in the real world .
The other is a plea to make some poor weirdos more acceptable in the present.
I go with pg at least he is trying for something that is achievable

In “Equality-land” I am very committed to my cat Snuggles. However, I also love my dog Diddums, she’s my beatch. What if I marry my cat but later on decide I really love my dog more? My dog is after all my best friend. Should there be an equality love test? My half sister loves my cat and my dog too, so can we all marry and be equally happy? After all, why should I discriminate between my cat, my dog and my half sister? People are just so judgmental.

Why is it that some NZ’s news outlet editors have no idea about what constitutes “business” in the normally-accepted sense of that term? Here are today’s five leading stories in the Stuff “Business” category on its website:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/8041851/Todd-family-takes-Pegasus-Town-reins Arguably the nearest thing to a business story in this bunch, but its principal business-related aspect is the news that privately-owned Todd Property Group has purchased the as-yet-undeveloped property assets of a North Canterbury “new town” project after the previous developer became bankrupt. A substantial part of the remainder of the story seems to be Todd PR material.

These leading “Business” stories, collectively, shed little if any light on the current or prospective performance of NZ business or businesses, on world business stories impacting on our economy, or on any other meaningful insight that might inform a reader genuinely interested in the business world.

If this is representative of the standard of so-called “business” journalism in New Zealand, is it any wonder that most people in our country remain economically illiterate?

Red, I suspect that my regular world news and business reading may be more balanced than yours. Regardless, I’m not going to cut myself off from reading and criticising NZ media whose editorial performance plays too great a part in moulding our political structures and policies, and their damaging under-performance in matters relating to our economy.

PG: I’m sorry mate, I am with your critics on this one.. the problems of some small fraction (the married ones who change teams mid match as it were) of the “transgender community” is REALLY the issue of the day for you?

Sue Couch finally getting some compensation after nearly being beaten to death by a piece of vermin who should never have been on the street? The issues raised by the Horan affair? No? Nothing else more important?

DG, no, it’s not ‘the issue of the day’, but it’s an issue that I think deserves to be publicised. Why shouldn’t it be? I think the country (and Kiwiblog) is capable of handling more than one topic a day.

PG: too true…GD is just that…a “general” debate…But tell me this… other than you and Marilyn Waring – who in a recent interview seems to think “transgender issues” are hugely important – how many people do you think use any of their neurons worrying about the problems of some transgender person who gets married and then decides to bat for the other team while still married?

I am quite concerned about the problems of old man’s beard and other noxious weeds endangering the fragment of native bush left in Kaukapakapa (working bee this Sunday for anyone who’s interested) but I dont think anyone else on KB would give a toss .

Pete, this is starting to have shades of the whole “men-only clubs” debate yesterday. I’m sorry that some people seem unable to accept that everybody is *not* equal, and you can’t simply legislate it away.

As you point out in your comment, there is a solution – get a divorce. You pointed out that someone who changes their sex can change their birth certificate to reflect that. Assuming one accepts the rationale behind doing that (which is another debate entirely), then you are essentially saying that this person is now a different person from who they were born as. If you change your sex from Pete George to Petra George, then Mrs George is living a completely different life now with Petra George than she was when she originally married Pete George. So why wouldn’t she divorce or dissolve the original marriage – because she is no longer married to Pete George – and then enter into a civil union with Petra George, if that’s the way her boat rocks?

DG – indications are that quite a few people think it’s important to support minority rights. That’s how Susan Couch seems to be about to get compensation she deserves. If people ignored her for their old man’s beard she’d have had no chance of geting anything.

A budget crisis wouldn’t really be a crisis unless it ran up against a much-loved American holiday season.

Thus the Fiscal Cliff has only truly reached the status of dire national emergency today, with Eric Cantor’s announcement that Congress won’t be able to take a holiday break until a “credible solution to the fiscal cliff has been found.”

The House was due to start its recess on Dec 14, but Cantor said firmly, “that is no longer the case.” Congress will officially still be in session the week of Dec 17-21, and perhaps even longer.

Republican congress members who don’t want to compromise are already planning to dig in for the holiday season. “Some people were like, ‘Let’s book hotel rooms and bring our families out here because we’re not going to fold our tent and give in,'” Rep. Aaron Schock (R-IL) told WaPo.

As you all know, Congress and Obama are attempting to strike a deal to avert the massive spending cuts and ~$2,000-per-family tax hikes set to kick in on January 1, 2013.

Via the Washington Post and Politico.

The US middle class is going to be taxed to oblivion over the next four years

Oh dear. I’m not going to argue about the impact of growing a beard on a relationship, that’s too close to Garfield.

Instead, let’s go back to this. If you change your sex from Pete George to Petra George, then Mrs George is living a completely different life now with Petra George than she was when she originally married Pete George. She is no longer married to Pete George. You do understand that, don’t you?

As you all know, Congress and Obama are attempting to strike a deal to avert the massive spending cuts and ~$2,000-per-family tax hikes set to kick in on January 1, 2013.

The fallacy of the decade!

The Messiah has no intention of striking a deal. He will be better off seeing the US going off the cliff, since it means an automatic tax hike on everyone, for which he will conveniently blame the Republicans.

Graham – yes, I do understand that, while the degree of “completely different life” can be debated it’s likely to substantially change the relationship in some cases. But in others where the relationship has changed from madly in love at marriage to living together as companions it would be much less so.

But that is a diversion from the issue.

If a relationship in a marriage changes significantly for any reason should that effectively force a divorce? Or should it be the free choice of the couple how to continue their relationsip and remain married or to get divorced?

You keep on trying to equate someone changing something about themselves such as a beard, or getting fat, or shaving their head, or buying a Harley (or all four) with someone who was (as transgender people put it) “assigned a sex at birth based on their genitals” – let’s say a man – lives their life quite happily as a man, marries a woman – then suddenly decides that this is wrong and he’s actually a woman.

They’re *not* *the* *same*. Deciding you’re a completely different person to how you’ve been living is not the same as getting fat.

(Edit: RightNow, yes I saw that story somewhere else, but decided not to mention it because Pete will quietly reason and debate that story to death now …)

So 64% of those surveyed want the population to increase. 40% of those surveyed want the population increase to be extraordinary large (double or more.)

And you somehow think that survey showed that people don’t want more immigration????

I think perhaps you need to swot up a bit on reading statistics.
….
5 million 24%
No more – we’ve got enough. 36%

that’s 60% wanting 5 million or less (now at 4,448,294 ). Also “80% of our population growth in the last couple of decades has been the net inflow of non NZ citizens”…. so people who grew up and adapted to big cities are having a say over native born New Zealanders.http://www.treasury.govt.nz/downloads/pdfs/mi-jarrett-comm.pdf

There is/ has been massive lobbying for more immigration from the vested interests (according to Gareth Morgan).

The term “Fiscal Cliff’ is really a complete misnomer as the total effect on the deficit in 2013 is estimated to be only $500 billion in a $16 trillion economy and it’s doubtful, anyway, the the Republicans want to go into the next midterms being blamed for tax hikes and a collapsing economy.

The bigger risk to US citizens is, in fact, the president’s own mindset that is sympathetic to reducing welfare and his apparent willingness to hurt a lot of vulnerable people for less than small change in savings.

However, for evidence of the triumph of ideology and the protection of privilege look no further than the truly dreadful times coming to Britain:

The danger here is that Key and English double down on their own economic incompetence and embark on a similar programme here using the increase in debt partly caused by their tax cuts for the wealthiest as there excuse, even though we are lightly indebted as regards public debt.

We want the exchange rate to come down? Borrow and build, print and spend!

They’re *not* *the* *same*. Deciding you’re a completely different person to how you’ve been living is not the same as getting fat.

Ah, no, they are not a ‘completely different person’. In most respects they are exactly the same person. For example a gender change does not involve a brain replacement.

In many cases they will be no more different (and debatably it could be less) than a spouse who converts to a religion or changes religion, which can make a substantial difference to how they live their lives.

If my wife became a devout Christian, or Muslim, or Church of Scientologist, or Mormon, or Krishnan, it would be a major change and have a major effect on our relationship.

Still trumped by 64% who want growth – 5m or more.
………..
the clear majority is for 5 million or less not 5 million or more (24% + 36%). Given the number of NZ citizens overseas and natural increase, that suggests we should be putting the brakes on.

As the reckless Western nations continue their headlong rush into a new, hotter and with exponentially more and greater extreme events, climate era, our problem won’t be how many we will let in – it will be about how many we can keep out.

I’m of the opinion, after a lifetime of opposition to military adventures, it may be time to buy some F16s and nuclear powered and armed subs etc.

Nooo, I’m saying if one of the marriage partners suddenly decides to change who they are, that’s a whole new ball-game.

You keep trying to make out that changing your sex is no different to growing a beard, getting religion, or buying a Harley. It IS different. Even the quote on your website from Diane Sparkes alludes to this:

Each partner is forced by the state to divorce the other even though love and support has maintained the relationship through arguably one of the most difficult situations any married couple will ever face.

Very few people refer to growing a beard/buying a Harley/getting fat as “arguably one of the most difficult situations any married couple will ever face.”

No. Try again. The total (in % terms) of those supporting a growth in population above the 4.4m today (i.e. 5m or more) is 64%.
…
a clear majority support population growth of no more than 12% above what we have today.

“I’m not going to cut myself off from reading and criticising NZ media”

Well good for you CG, but I am sure you understand they don’t really care. They know what they are doing. They know what they want and they will not be diverted from their mission by blog criticism or the like. The only way that these subversive scum will be defeated is by not reading buying or contributing in anyway possible to the economic structures that allow them their platform from which they broadcast their statist propaganda.

Read my latest blog post for an idea of how bad things really are. Its not so much the fault of a subversive media as it is the failure of the National Party to vigorously and courageously fight them.

Very good Redbaiter, exceopt that I see virtually the same lament on THe Standard with ‘right’ and ‘left’ transposed.

One interesting point you made:

You can see their supporters in the comments section of Whale’s blog, or Kiwiblog or other recognised “right of center” publications. Frantically supporting John “Pétain” Key and the Vichy Nationals only because the alternative is worse.

I don’t actually see a large amount of frantic support (or even mild support) for Key and National here or at Whale Oil.

Ganging up and attempting to ridicule or distract anyone who expresses unauthorised or unapproved views.

Ah, but how do we know who is authorised and who is not? For example, who approved the 20 year plan?

The only way that these subversive scum will be defeated is by not reading buying or contributing in anyway possible to the economic structures that allow them their platform from which they broadcast their statist propaganda.

RB how precisely can we do that unless we’re living in a cave in the mountains, surviving on C-Rations and the occasional rabbit, and never visiting the local town, or talking to anyone, ever again? Because I don’t want to do any of that if it can possibly be avoided.

“More than five inches of snow was predicted to fall on high ground in northern England and Scotland on Thursday, while up to 20mm of rain will affect the South.

Forecasters expect temperatures to remain bitterly cold until next week, with overnight temperatures plunging as low as 21F (-6C) on Wednesday night. “

And twelve years ago:

“Britain’s winter ends tomorrow with further indications of a striking environmental change: snow is starting to disappear from our lives.

According to Dr David Viner, a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia,within a few years winter snowfall will become “a very rare and exciting event”.

“Children just aren’t going to know what snow is,” he said.”

Yet we see people on KB quoting the University of East Anglia as a “credible source” to support their politically motivated hoax of AGW.

About 12,000 Luc. We’d have to invade Australia and enslave the whole population in a non-stop effort to dig up enough yellow-cake to make it even mildly possible I’m afraid, and the Australians seem to like their yellow-cake. Our one chance might be to use our undercover agent Hulun to subvert the UN so it seized them all and gave them to us, on the grounds we are known to be international nice guys, so it’s much fairer if we hold onto them.

On the plus side this makes Wussel’s pwinting pwan much more viable for if we’ve got nukes, we can make anyone accept the Kiwi, at any price, and if they don’t, well…

Where are the Greens hiding, they need to debunk these facts somehow, surely? 😉

Arctic thaws come and go

OPINION: I was interested in Arctic route opens (World, Dec 4).

During WWII, the reduction in sea ice in the Arctic Ocean prompted the German high command to send the Komet, a German freighter converted into an armed raider, across the northern route in early summer 1940, from the Atlantic through the Bering Strait into the Pacific Ocean.

There it created havoc to Allied shipping.

If one researches Russian shipping records from around the 1800s, it will be seen that this freezing and thawing of the northern route tends to be cyclical and not an unusual event.

Your attempt to make that survey conform to your views on immigration is a huge fail.

64% surveyed want NZ’s population to be 12% or greater than it is now.
………

but once you get to 5 million the proportion saying No more – we’ve got enough = 60%. Of course we will be needing more immigrants at that stage: it will be essential for the well being of the country blah, blah!

Immigration
Degrades the environment the very reason that many stay for The more people the more stress on the environment.
This includes the water quality of your local beach or the ability to take part in new Zealands most popular and most economically productive sport fishing. Many of us enjoy the country’s bountiful opportunities of outdoor pursuits.

It also impacts on transport and housing infrastructure. Auckland is paying for the increased population. In the cost of having to expand compounded by a constant round of infrastructure rebuilding. As most of the immigrant stay in the city. Many begrudge our largest city even the share of funds the region is entitled to.

@Manolo
I agree it sucks, but it is possible to apply for a standard visa (like the rest of the world) and have the full list of entitlements that way. Excludes many though as the bar is high, like you have to actually be skilled.

“The only way that these subversive scum will be defeated is by not reading buying or contributing in anyway possible to the economic structures that allow them their platform ….”

Sorry, Red. I don’t buy into such extreme positions or name-calling. I don’t see New Zealand msm outlets like Stuff, the Herald, TV1, TV3 et al. as “subversive scum”. In my view, many of their editorial people are socialist-leaning, are misguided ideologically, and are very poorly educated – especially when it comes to understanding anything about business or the workings of a market economy. But they are entitled to hold and express their views, and even to try and convince others to adopt such views. It’s called freedom of expression.

What I would prefer to see is NZ’s business organisations and individual, business-literate people constantly challenging those views vigorously in the public arena (in the msm, blogs and elsewhere) so that fellow-NZers are not allowed to gain an impression that steering the country further to the left economically is our only hope for a better future. No one person or political leader will do it alone. Nor will a lone “reformer” like yourself, unless you can actually persuade people to listen to your message, without your constantly berating and alienating them.

You obviously need educating yourself on what “freedom of expression” actually means.

For example, one thing it does not mean is that people are compelled to buy newspapers or watch television when these outlets are controlled by subversives who are out to deliberately misinform and intentionally alter political perceptions.

Which appears to be your thesis.

Only government action can offend against traditional freedom of expression, and you will note I am not calling for that. And I never do.

What I would prefer to see is NZ’s business organisations and individual, business-literate people constantly challenging those views vigorously in the public arena (in the msm, blogs and elsewhere)

This is an unbelieveable expression of naivety. Don’t you think they fucking well would if they could? Ask Owen McShane for one example of why he is persona non grata on Radio New Zealand.

These outlets (apart from the blogosphere, and that soon will be) are all controlled by left wing gate keepers, and they will not allow alternative opinions except in token instances or when it suits them. Or as a target of ridicule.

You need to wake up. It is unaware head in sand dreamers like you who allow the left to dominate our social and cultural and political condition.

You and your soft political ignorance are why we have been losing for so long and why we are so deep in the shit right now.

Very well put Calendar Girl, but as you can already see trying to explain something reasonably to Redbaiter is like trying to explain the birds and the bees to a crocodile (the type brilliantly photographed by Chthoniid).

All it does is gets you added to his database of about four and a half million Kiwis who just don’t get his brilliiant strategy so therefore must be filed as lefty scum.

What I would prefer to see is NZ’s business organisations and individual, business-literate people constantly challenging those views vigorously in the public arena

Many of us would like to see that. However, the left leaning media are careful not to give equal representation to anyone who goes against their socialist ideology. It is not a level playing field. Often when alternative views are allowed to be aired, they are edited and spun in order to misrepresent them.

I agree that people should be allow to hold/express whatever views they like. The problem is that many views are denied a voice in contemporary New Zealand.

Denied a voice? That others do not assist in facilitating the dissemination of your views does not imply you are denied a voice. If enough people share a viewpoint then there exists a market to pander to them. Fox News does it superbly. Leighton Smith gives it a good go as well.

Weihana the point is in context by proportion the lefties dominate. You idiots have both TV channels completely sewn up. Leaving enough truth for those intelligent enough to explore to find out for themselves, but not enough to promulgate it 24/7/365 ubiquitously, as you guys do.

Weihana the point is in context by proportion the lefties dominate. You idiots have both TV channels completely sewn up. Leaving enough truth for those intelligent enough to explore to find out for themselves, but not enough to promulgate it 24/7/365 ubiquitously, as you guys do.

I wasn’t aware I had a stake in either of the TV channels. I certainly don’t watch them very often. Suffice to say if there is a great untapped market out there then put your money where your mouth is and start up your own news channel.

However, the left leaning media are careful not to give equal representation to anyone who goes against their socialist ideology. It is not a level playing field.

Media bias and hate speech laws are not the same thing.

For the record I would support getting rid of section 61 of the Human Rights Act. Racists are entitled to their (stupid) opinions as much as anyone provided their speech meets the standards as would apply to any other type of speech (e.g. does not incite violence).

You know the one. That is the law where Maori can make openly racist comments about Europeans, but Europeans can not return the favour in kind.

Yeah I think you’re imagining that law. Nowhere under s61 is there an exception for Maori.

The MSM is extremely and openly left wing. It is no secret to anyone. Denying it eats away your credibility.

Yeah I think you’re imagining that law. Nowhere under s61 is there an exception for Maori.

NZ must be the only place in the world where saying, handouts should be given on the basis of need NOT race, is screamed down as racist in the media and by the race relations commissioner. They are still going on about years later !

A Maori can call Europeans any thing they like and even make comments about killing them. No problem. There is an exception for Maori, but it is not written in s61. I actually like the outspoken Maori MP’s. I just want the same freedoms extended to all people.

The people who are really behind this have far darker motives. They are the puppet masters. They want power. AGW is simply a means to an end. The destruction of free market, capitalist, democratic society, is their intention.

Tell me more Kea about this global conspiracy.

Who has been destroying the free market, capitalist, democratic society.

How have they taken over the evil scientists? How did they take over the New Zealand government, The American government, the UN and all the rest. Who planned it all?

You should keep reading it Griff. It’s a big book with lots of stuff in it. Just scroll through a couple of chapters and you’ll see. It’s all history. Spelled out in detail. You asked, that tells you what you asked for. Read it. Like I said, it’s a big book.

It is indeed a big book, however that is about the only thing you have said that is true about it.

That book you mention is full of hate, lies (it is after all nothing more than a work of fiction) and bigotry.

The world would be a far better place without that book, we would have almost no wars, a lot less people and we would be able to combat diseases like AIDS a lot easier. Our kids would also be a hell of a lot safer than they are now.

By all means cite factual errors bb. Go ahead. Give us the page numbers and let’s discuss. But facts are facts and so what if you don’t like it because it offends you. So what. Is it a fact? Yes or no. That’s the only relevant question. Honestly I’ve never understood why people get excited about facts. I mean, why? What the heck is wrong with someone who sees a fact, a thing that’s there, there it is, and proceeds to get all emotional and pretend it’s not a fact after all simply because they don’t like it? I mean crikey.

Explain the global conspiracy
Don’t keep such major news to yourself kea

The people who are really behind this have far darker motives. They are the puppet masters. They want power. AGW is simply a means to an end. The destruction of free market, capitalist, democratic society, is their intention.

Who are the people, the puppet masters
Does your phone click, do you see men in dark glasses following you, have the aliens Inserted your anal probe yet?

Redbaiter: With absolutely no hesitation, I will promise to never visit your blog site again.

Reid: I have tried reading the Bible, starting in Genesis and working my way through. I didn’t get beyond Leviticus – the constant violent atrocities of the Old Testament put me off. I am giving it a second chance by starting fresh with the New Testament. So far (halfway through Matthew) it has been boring and uninspiring, but not outright distasteful like the Old Testament was.

Those are two of my favourites. Romans holds many lessons and explanations on faith. On the first few readings it’s hard to understand but it becomes clearer. Ephesians is a very poetic letter from Paul to one of the original Christian Church communities.

It helps to sincerely ask God for discernment and understanding just before reading it. God bless.

No I said it cites lot of historic facts bb. Names, dates, places, events. Last I heard, those are some of the essential attributes of something that claims to be a “fact.”

So if you want to scroll to any page and pick a name, date, place or event and discuss it, go ahead. Otherwise don’t ask me about biblical stories, because that’s not what my link referred to and the story you ask about is also not what my link even mentioned, so somewhere along the line bb, something’s happened and you’ve invented some reality that only you are in. Possibly you’ve crossed over into Langolier country bb.

Nature Conservancy lists BP as one of its business partners. The Conservancy also has given BP a seat on its International Leadership Council and has accepted nearly $10 million in cash and land contributions from BP and affiliated corporations over the years.

Four big international companies, including the oil giant Exxon Mobil, said yesterday that they would give Stanford University $225 million over 10 years for research on ways to meet growing energy needs without worsening global warming.

Exxon Mobil, whose pledge of $100 million makes it the biggest of the four contributors, issued a statement saying new techniques for producing energy while reducing emissions of heat-trapping greenhouse gases were ”vital to meeting energy needs in the industrialized and developing world.

…

In 2000, Ford and Exxon Mobil’s global rival, BP, gave $20 million to Princeton to start a similar climate and energy research program.”

Has it occurred to you that “big oil” figured out long ago how to profit either way from climatology griff? Just like the big insurance/reinsurance companies who get to increase their premiums, and the big financial institutions who want to run carbon exchanges.

Yes RN lets hear your global conspiracy
All the details please government’s scientific bodies that have nothing to do with climate change everyone I has named as involved.
Kea insists on keeping his perpetrators hidden.

Reid: I was intending to simply read through from beginning to end. So (sincerely) thank you, I will now read those books first. To be honest I doubt they will change my view, but I will read them and try to keep an open mind

Apologies, I didn’t actually answer your question regarding sex education. Myself, my peers, and those younger than us were all educated under the system you describe. As far as I can tell (including my personal experience) they are well-adjusted people, no better or worse prepared for the world than any other generation. I haven’t heard any of them calling for people to be lined up and shot, which I regard as a positive.

Word is that a senior Labour MP (who will go unnamed) has been lobbying National Council to put rules in place for party members who participate in the blogosphere. It appears they don’t like the idea that members might voice their concerns about the way their party is run. I can only assume that there would have to be some kind of a process whereby members who broke these rules would face a loss of membership or some other form of censure.

Get a grip Griff, you keep claiming the oil industry is funding ‘the nutters’ but it’s easy to show (as I have done) that they actually fund climatology by more than 100 times anything skeptics have received.

RB @ 4:08 – “For example, one thing it [freedom of expression] does not mean is that people are compelled to buy newspapers or watch television when these outlets are controlled by subversives who are out to deliberately misinform and intentionally alter political perceptions.”

Please, Red, don’t put words in my mouth – I never claimed any compulsion on anyone to read newspapers or watch TV of any kind. You said to me, in your customarily offensive way: “Why read those Pravda outlets anyway??” and I gave my reasons, in a reasonable manner, for keeping abreast of their material and taking my limited opportunities to present opposing views.

You yourself have no monopoly of interpretation of the term “freedom of expression”, Red. Your bluster, bullying, personal name-calling and crude poverty of language do your views little credit in that very context. That applies also to the causes that you espouse. But, Red, you too enjoy “freedom of expression”. I respect that freedom which you exercise freely; why do you find it obligatory on your part to abuse mine? (Even though we may be basically in agreement on certain fundamental principles – if only one could get behind your politico-macho facade of outrage to find out.)

You contend that “Only government action can offend against traditional freedom of expression …” While that is a challenging observation, it’s not true – at least that’s my personal view. Witness widespread attempts to intimidate and muzzle people when they express views that offend some on the left, or views that offend certain minorities such as Maori, women or gay people. You yourself are not bad at such offending “against traditional freedom of expression”, Red. I expect that many readers tend to turn away from expressing their own views fully in the face of your personalised fusillades of intemperance and extremism.

Finally, did you really mean to commend me to “Ask Owen McShane for one example of why he is persona non grata on Radio New Zealand”? I used to follow Mr McShane’s contemporary views with interest, and agreed with many of them, but sadly that element of my wider reading ceased with his untimely death nine months or so ago.

Come on RN
Yours is the biggest global conspiracy I have ever heard of. Do tell more. Who is in charge of subverting the governments of the world ? How have they taken over the peer review process? Who is directing the royal society and the American academy of science? So many people involved its huge.

At least my conspiracy has names, dates, tax returns ,accounts all the rest of the paper work and a reasonable amount of probability what do you have?

Wow, your link:
“Powell details the support of ExxonMobil for denialism, but omits the combative Koch brothers, owners of Koch Energy, the world’s largest privately held energy company. ExxonMobil is the biggest funder of global-warming denialism, spending nearly $16 million on more than forty organizations over the period 1998–2005.”

$16 million huh? Geez, that really puts their $100 million to Stanford in perspective.

A view that reinforces my original point, in that you apprently do not understand the issue, so while you so offensively preach to me your patronising crap on how I should behave to receive the favour of my socialist betters, you still show a stark inability to understand that interaction among the free market and free people is not anything that can be accurately described as limiting freedom of expression.

I can say what I want, and so can TV 3. It is only government who can legislate to control what is said, and right under your nose they have done so frequently over the last few decades, and will continue down that path no doubt with the blessing of lame and tame peasant ignorami like yourself.

And if “extremism” means that I expect the National Party to live up to the principles it was founded upon then I plead guilty without a skerrick of regret.

And if you think those principles are extreme then its you that is at fault and not myself, for they were principles that served this country and the Nats well for many years.

“To promote good citizenship and self-reliance; to combat communism and socialism; to maintain freedom of contract; to encourage private enterprise; to safeguard individual rights and the privilege of ownership; to oppose interference by the State in business, and State control of industry”

Today, the Nats have disavowed and ridicule those very principles that were the foundation of so much success for this country. I will criticise them harshly for this betrayal. Whether you and the like soft left wing that today supports them (and their treachery) like it or not.

Beryl you know I can not give names that would not be fair
Except maybe denominations that would be ok
That’s the Anglican priest and Pentecostal “pastors?” daughters in the area Plus the daughter of quite a well-known missionary. 😉 And her J W mate.

Let me guess you were playing rugby

Running around on a field chasing a bladder in a cover.

In some ancient ritual that involves a scrum where you all get down and sniff arses.

Leaving aside the pitifully infantile phrasing of the question, the UN is behind much of the leftist nonsense that prevails in the west, along with organisations like Socialist International, a club that most left wing politicians (including most NZ left wing politicians) belong to and the means by which they co-ordinate global strategy to bring down capitalism.

Helen Klark was/ is prominent in SI, and has now moved on to the UN. Anyone who claims there is no left wing globally co-ordinated political strategy is just another head in the sand denier of reality.

Um, by relative merits you may not have realised that I am praising the ‘relative’ sanity of some, but by no means all, of the Kiwiblog community when compared to Whale’s site, which I suggest would be a more logical home base for the likes of you and Redbaiter.

“Um, by relative merits you may not have realised that I am praising the ‘relative’ sanity of some, but by no means all, of the Kiwiblog community ”

Of course, anyone who doesn’t buy into the same beltway elitist opinions as you and the rest of the desk piloting shiney arsed bureaucrats is insane.

You need to do some research on the historical origins of that kind of attitude. You could start by reading Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn’s “The Gulag Archipelago”, detailing the world of prison camps, secret police, informers, spies and interrogators that characterised Stalinist Russia.

The text is based on the author’s own experience of 11 years in labour camps and the testimony of 200 other survivors. Most were incarcerated because they were adjudicated as insane for resisting the collectivist tyranny that killed millions of Russians.

In fact it is you and your robber baron arrogant ilk and your dopey uninformed urban liberal army who are completely out of touch with real NZ.